The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-02-26
THE HARMONY OF THE JUDGES.

at present is the decision Of the Supreme
Court that the courts have no jurisdiction of
the contest concerning the lieutenant-gov-
ernorship, and that the decision of the whole
matter belongs exclusively to the General
Assembly. This has been the position of the
Journal and of the Republicans generally
from the beginning Of the controversy. The
ratification of this position by the Supreme
Court does not, indeed, make it any stronger
than it was before, for it was right all the
time, but it is gratifying To emphasize the
point and show how completely in harmony
a majority of the court were, we quote few
sentences from their individual opinions
Chiefjustice Elliott said:
cit Isl at all events, very evident that the
makers of our Constitution deemed it wise to
limit the power of the courts by investing the
General Assembly with authority to decide all
contests involving the title to the two princi-
pal executive offices of the State.
''The Constitution vests in the General
Assembly sole and supreme jurisdiction over
all disputes, controversies or questions, what
soever form or posture they may assume
arising out of a contest for the office of Gov
ernor or Acknowledgements"
In arguing this point Judge Elliott went
deeply into the principles of constitutional
Gus authorities.
Judge Niblack did not draw so largely from
outside authorities, but devoted even more
space to an analysis of the Constitution. He
said:
'The Constitution says that Contested
elections for Governor and Lieutenant-go s-
ernor shall be determined by the General AS
sembly.' This is equivalent to saying that
all such contested elections must be so deter
mined. Whatever power the courts
might otherwise have had to adjudicate con-
troversies arising out of elections for Govern
or or Lieutenant-governor all jurisdiction
over such questions has been conferred upon
the General Assembly, to be exercised by it in
such manner as has been or may be hereafter
prescribed by law, and consequently the
courts Of the State are wholly without juris-
diction to determine such controversies y
The courts have absolutely nothing to do,
either with Inducing the Governor and Lieu
tenant-governor into office or with excluding
them therefrom in the first instance, or in
getting them out of office after they may have
forfeited their right to remain in Under the pc
culiar structure of our State Constitution
these are political and hence not judicial ques-
tions, and are committed to the General AS
sembly as the chief representative of the po-
litical power Of the State"
The reasoning by which Judge Niblack
reached these conclusions, and the arguments
by which he enforced them were characteris-
tic of the man and his intellectual processes
plain, strong, honest and convincing
Judge collars followed different line OF
argument from the others, but reached The
same conclusion. His discussion Of the con-
stitutional provision covering the case and of
the principles governing its Interpretation
showed great legal acumen, coupled with
remarkably lucid and judicial Style He said:
"Section of Article of the Constitution
(Revised Statutes of 1881, Section 1927 was,
IN his Judgment, controlling and conclusive
against the right Of the reator, Smith, to
maintain this action, being as follows:
Contested elections for Governor or Lieu
tenant-governor shall be determined by the
General Assembly in such manner as may be
prescribed by law
THAT section invested the Assembly with
Judicial power to hear and determine such con-
tested election. The Constitution
created the General Assembly the exclusive
tribunal FOR the determination of contested
elections for Governor and Lieutenant-gov-
ernor Although not in name, this
was proceeding to contest the election of the
respondent to the office of Lieutenant govern
or. The relator Was thus waging a contest
in the courts which by the Constitution be-
longe9 to another forum. 1t must be waged
and settled before the General Assembly.
That tribunal alone had jurisdiction of the
subject-matter."
Thus the learned judges, guided by the
lights of the Constitution, and of general
legal principles and by somewhat different.
paths and processes of reasoning, all reached
the same conclusion, viz: that the decision of
acontested election for the Lieutenant-gov
ernorship belongs, in all its parts and phases,
exclusively to the General Assembly.
Itfollows that the action already taken by
the Speaker of the House and the joint con-
vention in ascertaining and publishing the re-
suit of the election was strictly legal and that
Colonel Robertson's title to the office of Lieu
tenant governor is valid until contested before
the Legislature in the manner prescribed bv
law. 1t follows further, that Green Smith is
a usurper and his supporters revolutionists.
THE QUESTION ILLUSTRATED.
The demand of the Sentinel that the Judges
Of the Supreme Court shall commit perjury.
by violating their official oaths, and volunteer